Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 42 references

Adaptive control for multi-scale stochastic dynamical systems with stochastic next generation reservoir computing

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims a data-driven feedback controller, built from next-generation reservoir computing with explicit noise features, that asymptotically tracks desired trajectories in multiscale stochastic systems and proves convergence via…

desk verdict The noise-feature trick is a genuine but small improvement to NG-RC, and the Van der Pol experiments are plausible; the advertised stability proof, however, is never actually connected to the closed loop, and the convergence guarantee is mostly a design assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.09327 v1 pith:ZRDMDSAF submitted 2025-05-14 math.DS cs.SYeess.SY

Jiani Cheng , Ting Gao , Jinqiao Duan This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.DScs.SYeess.SY MSC 93E1593C4060H10
keywords stochasticdynamicalsystemsnext-generationreservoircomputingadaptivecontrolmultiscaleLaSalletheoremevent-triggeredVanderPoloscillatorEEGseizuresuppression
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is trying to establish that a next-generation reservoir computing controller, modified to include an explicit noise feature vector, can make a multiscale stochastic dynamical system asymptotically track a prescribed target trajectory even when the underlying drift and diffusion terms are unknown. The claimed guarantee is that the tracking error converges almost surely to an invariant set, established through an extended stochastic LaSalle theorem rather than through model-based stochastic control. If the claim holds, this gives a computationally cheap, data-driven route to stabilizing noisy oscillatory systems, with the numerical experiments showing rapid tracking on a stochastic Van der Pol oscillator under additive and multiplicative noise and partial suppression of seizure-like EEG oscillations.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the stochastic feature stack $O_{\mathrm{total}}=\{O_{\mathrm{lin},i},O_{\mathrm{nonlin},i},O_{u,i},O_{n,i}\}$, containing one-step delayed states, monomials up to third order, the control input, and the noise increment; ridge regression produces the output weights $W_{\mathrm{out}}$, and the controller inverts the $W_u$ block to enforce the error recursion. The stability argument is carried by the operator $\mathcal{L}$ of the controlled error SDE and a Lyapunov function $V(e,t)$ satisfying $\mathcal{L}V\le\gamma(t)-w(e)$, with $\gamma$ integrable and $w$ a nonnegative continuous function whose zero set is the attractor.

What would settle it

Run the closed loop at parameter settings where the reported Y-component RMSE exceeds 1.0 (for example, $\varepsilon=0.1$, $\sigma=2$) and check whether the tracking error keeps decreasing toward zero over a long horizon; if the error saturates or diverges despite the claimed LaSalle conditions, the asymptotic convergence guarantee would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a closed-loop control law for stochastic systems learned entirely from data. After training the ridge-regression model $X_{i+1}=W_X O_{X,i}+W_u O_{u,i}+W_n O_{n,i}$ on a perturbed version of the system, the controller sets $O_{u,i}=W_u^{-1}[X_{\mathrm{des},i+1}-W_X O_{X,i}-W_n O_{n,i}+K e_i]$ with $\rho(K)<1$, so that the tracking error would evolve as $e_{i+1}=K e_i$ if the model were exact. The paper proves, for the associated continuous-time controlled SDE, a stochastic LaSalle proposition: under local Lipschitz and linear-growth conditions, a Lyapunov inequality $\mathcal{L}V\le\gamma(t)-w(e)$ with $\gamma\in L^1$, and bounded $p$-th moments, the error converges almost surely to the invariant set $\{e:w(e)=0\}$. The experiments then show this controller tracks amplitude-modulated targets in a multiscale stochastic Van der Pol system under additive and multiplicative noise and reduces seizure-like oscillations in an EEG-derived one-dimensional SDE.

Load-bearing premise

The tracking guarantee assumes the ridge-regression model (5) is an exact representation of the controlled system and that the learned input-weight matrix $W_u$ is invertible, because the control law (8) is derived by substituting the model so that the error follows $e_{i+1}=K e_i$ exactly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the low-noise single-scale case, the controlled system reaches the desired trajectory within 1-2 time steps, with a control RMSE of $0.1654$.
  • At $\sigma_1=1$, $\sigma_2=2$, $\varepsilon=0.5$, the conventional NG-RC controller diverges at step 302 while the stochastic NG-RC keeps the control signal bounded and achieves total RMSE $0.3632$.
  • Under multiplicative noise ($\sigma_1=0.8$, $\sigma_2=1$, $\varepsilon=0.1$), the slow variable tracks closely and the total RMSE is $0.2359$.
  • On EEG-derived resting and seizure dynamics, the controller reduces large-amplitude seizure oscillations toward the resting-state distribution over a 100-step interval, with control RMSE $0.0752$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the stability proof is carried out in continuous time while the controller operates in discrete time, a natural next step is a discrete-time stochastic Lyapunov argument or an explicit discretization-error bound; the paper does not close that gap.
  • If the learned model is not exact, the error recursion becomes $e_{i+1}=K e_i+\eta_i$ with an unmodeled residual $\eta_i$, so adding a robustifying term or an online update of the output weights would be a testable extension toward a guarantee that survives model error.
  • On the EEG task, control performance degrades near the end of the interval and depends on the random perturbation used in training, suggesting that structured perturbation design, rather than random forcing, is likely the key lever for clinical translation; this is an inference, not a result tested in the paper.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a stochastic next-generation reservoir computing (S-NGRC) controller for trajectory tracking in multiscale stochastic dynamical systems. The method trains an NG-RC ridge-regression model that includes noise features, then inverts the learned input weight matrix to compute a control input designed to make the tracking error satisfy e_{i+1}=K e_i with ρ(K)<1. The paper claims that asymptotic stability of this controller is rigorously proved via an extended stochastic LaSalle theorem, and it presents numerical experiments on a stochastic Van der Pol system with additive and multiplicative noise and a seizure-suppression simulation using EEG data.

Significance. If the theoretical guarantee claimed in the abstract were established, the paper would be a valuable contribution connecting data-driven reservoir control with stochastic stability theory. The manuscript does provide a self-contained statement and proof of a generic stochastic LaSalle-type theorem for controlled SDEs in Appendix A.1, and the Van der Pol simulations are described with enough detail (training/test splits, RMSE values, parameter sweeps) to be plausible as an empirical study. However, the central stability claim is not supported: the theorem is never instantiated for the proposed control law, and the control design in Eq. (8) enforces error contraction only under exact-model and invertibility assumptions that are neither provable nor verified. The EEG experiment, as the authors acknowledge, exhibits growing long-term error and is carried out on the fitted SDE rather than on recorded dynamics directly.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, Eq. (8)] The derivation of the control law assumes that the learned model (5) is exact and that W_u is invertible. Writing the true closed-loop recursion with residual r_i = X_{i+1}^{true} - (W_X O_{X,i}+W_u O_{u,i}+W_n O_{n,i}), substitution of (8) gives e_{i+1}=K e_i + r_i. The paper provides no bound on r_i and no conditions under which the ridge-regression weight matrix W_u is invertible, so ρ(K)<1 alone does not imply convergence. Thus the tracking guarantee is imposed by design rather than established.
  2. [§4 and Appendix A.1, Proposition 1] Proposition 1 is a continuous-time stability theorem for a generic controlled SDE under hypotheses (H1), (19)-(21). The paper never verifies these hypotheses for the S-NGRC closed loop: no Lyapunov function V, no function w, no integrable γ are constructed, and no argument connects the discrete, event-triggered recursion (5)-(8) to the continuous-time SDE (18) of the proposition. In particular, condition (21) concerns existence of p-th moments of the solution of (18), which depends on the feedback law and is not checked. The abstract's claim of rigorous asymptotic stability is therefore unsupported.
  3. [§5.2.2] The EEG control experiment trains the controller on perturbed trajectories generated from the fitted SDE (16) and then applies the controller to trajectories from the same fitted SDE; this validates control of the model, not of the recorded EEG signals. The paper also states that control performance deteriorates near t=490 and lists accumulation of long-term control errors as a limitation, directly weakening the conclusion of effective seizure suppression.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.1] On page 4, 'the the discretization step' contains a duplicated article.
  2. [§4] The section heading 'Stablity analysis' should be 'Stability analysis'.
  3. [§5.1.2] The text before Eq. (11) spells 'Lassalle' instead of 'LaSalle'.
  4. [Figure 14 caption] The caption contains the typo 'wihch', which should be 'which'.
  5. [§5.2.1] The model is described as one-dimensional even though the data are 23-channel; please clarify that a single channel is selected for modeling.
  6. [§5.2.2] The sentence 'The bottom panel (left two segments: Phase A and B)' appears twice in consecutive paragraphs; remove the duplication.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Controller convergence is imposed by Eq. (8); EEG validation is in-sample on a fitted SDE.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.2, Eq. (7)-(8); Section 4]
    "To achieve the desired control, assuming e_{i+1}=Ke_i, we design the control signal as O_{u,i}=W_u^{-1}[X_{des,i+1}-W_X O_{X,i}-W_n O_{n,i}+Ke_i]. (8) To ensure error convergence, the spectral radius of the closed-loop gain matrix K must satisfy ρ(K)<1."

    Eq. (8) solves Eq. (7) for O_{u,i} under the imposed equality e_{i+1}=K e_i. Therefore the closed-loop error recursion is K e_i by construction whenever the learned model (5) is exact and W_u is invertible; the paper supplies neither model-error bounds nor invertibility conditions. The convergence 'guarantee' is thus the design assumption, not a consequence of the stochastic LaSalle theorem in Appendix A.1, whose hypotheses (V, γ, w satisfying (19)-(21)) are never instantiated for this discrete learned loop.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 5.2.2, Data Generation and Training / Control Results]
    "To train the stochastic NG-RC controller, a random perturbation signal u_t is introduced into the numerical iteration of Eq. (16), generating the perturbed trajectory ... In the control phase (Phase C ...), starting from t=400, the evolution of the controlled trajectory depends solely on its past states and the control input u_t generated by the stochastic NG-RC."

    Eq. (16) is the SDE whose drift and diffusion coefficients (Table 1) were fitted to the same 1500 EEG samples by sparse regression. Both the perturbed training trajectory and the Phase C 'controlled trajectory' are Euler-Maruyama simulations of this fitted model, so the controller is validated against the fitted generative model, not against the recorded EEG or any held-out dynamics. The claimed 'seizure suppression' is an in-sample consistency check: the fitted input (the SDE) is used to generate both training and evaluation data.

full rationale

The central stability claim reduces to the construction in Eq. (8): the control input is algebraically chosen so that e_{i+1}=K e_i, and convergence is then asserted from ρ(K)<1. The stochastic LaSalle proposition in Appendix A.1 is an external continuous-time theorem and is not itself circular, but it is never instantiated for the discrete learned NG-RC loop, so the paper's 'rigorous' guarantee is essentially the design equation restated as a theorem. The EEG experiment is also in-sample: the SDE governing both training and evaluation trajectories is fitted to the same EEG data, so the controller is tested against its own fitted model rather than against independent real dynamics. The Van der Pol simulations are more self-contained because the plant is a known SDE, which prevents a higher score, but the main theoretical and EEG claims are partially circular. No load-bearing self-citation was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces a noise feature vector in the algorithm, but this is a component of the method, not a postulated physical entity with independent evidence.

free parameters (4)
  • Ridge regression parameter α for S-NGRC = 7.7426e-7 (low-noise VDP); 0.1931 (EEG)
    Chosen to optimize one-step prediction on training data; directly sets W_out in Eq. (6) and therefore the control law (8).
  • Sparsity thresholds α, β for EEG Kramers-Moyal fit = α=0.0012, β=1e-5
    Selected via LassoCV; determine the fitted drift and diffusion coefficients in Table 1.
  • Closed-loop gain matrix K = not specified (ρ(K)<1)
    Design parameter that fixes error decay rate; the stability claim depends on ρ(K)<1, but no concrete value or tuning procedure is given.
  • Feature vector design (monomials up to order 3, one-step delay)
    Choice of basis functions and delay embedding is made by hand and affects the learned model's accuracy; no comparison or selection criterion is provided.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Local Lipschitz and linear growth conditions on f, φ1, g, φ2 (H1).
    Stated in Section A.1 as necessary for the stochastic LaSalle theorem, but never verified for the Van der Pol or EEG systems.
  • domain assumption Existence of a Lyapunov function V satisfying radial unboundedness (19) and LV ≤ γ(t) - w(e) (20).
    The proposition assumes such a V; the paper does not construct V for the S-NGRC closed loop, so the theorem cannot be applied to the actual controller.
  • domain assumption Uniform p-th moment bound sup_t E|e(t)|^p < ∞ (21).
    Another hypothesis of Proposition 1 that is not established for the controlled systems studied.
  • ad hoc to paper Invertibility of the learned input weight matrix W_u in Eq. (8).
    The control law computes W_u^{-1}; no condition or verification of invertibility is given, and it is not guaranteed by ridge regression.
  • domain assumption The Euler-Maruyama discretization with Δt < 1/||∇f(X)||_max is stable and accurate enough for learning.
    Assumed throughout Section 3.1; the bound is stated but not used in the stability analysis.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Adaptive control for multi-scale stochastic dynamical systems with stochastic next generation reservoir computing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZRDMDSAF

@misc{pith2026250509327,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Adaptive control for multi-scale stochastic dynamical systems with stochastic next generation reservoir computing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZRDMDSAF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.09327}
}
read the original abstract

The rapid advancement of neuroscience and machine learning has established data-driven stochastic dynamical system modeling as a powerful tool for understanding and controlling high-dimensional, spatio-temporal processes. We introduce the stochastic next-generation reservoir computing (NG-RC) controller, a framework that integrates the computational efficiency of NG-RC with stochastic analysis to enable robust event-triggered control in multiscale stochastic systems. The asymptotic stability of the controller is rigorously proven via an extended stochastic LaSalle theorem, providing theoretical guarantees for amplitude regulation in nonlinear stochastic dynamics. Numerical experiments on a stochastic Van-der-Pol system subject to both additive and multiplicative noise validate the algorithm, demonstrating its convergence rate across varying temporal scales and noise intensities. To bridge theoretical insights with real-world applications, we deploy the controller to modulate pathological dynamics reconstructed from epileptic EEG data. This work advances a theoretically guaranteed scalable framework for adaptive control of stochastic systems, with broad potential for data-driven decision making in engineering, neuroscience, and beyond.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.09327 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Stochastic NG-RC framework diagram (take 2D sde as an example). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Phase portrait of the original, perturbed, and desired trajectories under low-intensity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Training results for stochastic NG-RC in low-intensity noise scenarios without multiple [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Phase-space tracking performance of the stochastic NG-RC controller in low-intensity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Control results of the conventional NG-RC at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Control results of the stochastic NG-RC at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Noise robustness analysis of the stochastic Van der Pol system under varying noise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Control error sensitivity of the stochastic Van der Pol system under varying noise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Control results for stochastic NG-RC under multiplicative noise. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Prediction performance of the Kramers-Moyal network on the governing law of EEG [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) comparison between true and predicted data. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Control of one-dimensional EEG data using the stochastic NG-RC controller. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Kernel density estimation (KDE) comparison for long-term control under the stochas [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Control performance of the stochastic NG-RC under low-intensity noise without [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_14.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1986

    Chihiro Hayashi.Nonlinear Oscillations in Physical Systems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1986

    work page 1986

  2. [2]

    Theory and examples of intrinsically nonlinear oscillators.American Journal of Physics, 72:492–498, 2004

    Pirooz Mohazzabi. Theory and examples of intrinsically nonlinear oscillators.American Journal of Physics, 72:492–498, 2004

    work page 2004

  3. [3]

    Critical analysis for nonlinear oscillations by least square hpm.Scientific Reports, 14, 2024

    Muhammad Rafiq, Muhammad Kamran, Hijaz Ahmad, and Afis Saliu. Critical analysis for nonlinear oscillations by least square hpm.Scientific Reports, 14, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Pulsatile stimulation determines timing and specificity of nf-κb-dependent transcription.Science, 324(5924):242–246, 2009

    Louise Ashall, Caroline A Horton, David E Nelson, Pawel Paszek, Claire V Harper, Kate Sillitoe, Sheila Ryan, David G Spiller, John F Unitt, David S Broomhead, et al. Pulsatile stimulation determines timing and specificity of nf-κb-dependent transcription.Science, 324(5924):242–246, 2009

    work page 2009

  5. [5]

    Temporal self-organization of the cyclin/cdk net- work driving the mammalian cell cycle.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(51):21643–21648, 2009

    Claude Gérard and Albert Goldbeter. Temporal self-organization of the cyclin/cdk net- work driving the mammalian cell cycle.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(51):21643–21648, 2009

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    Sys- tems biology of cellular rhythms.FEBS letters, 586(18):2955–2965, 2012

    Albert Goldbeter, Claude Gérard, Didier Gonze, J-C Leloup, and Genevieve Dupont. Sys- tems biology of cellular rhythms.FEBS letters, 586(18):2955–2965, 2012

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    Ajjarapu and B

    V. Ajjarapu and B. H. Lee. Bifurcation theory and its application to nonlinear dynamical phenomena in an electrical power system.[Proceedings] Conference Papers 1991 Power Industry Computer Application Conference, pages 312–319, 1991

    work page 1991

  8. [8]

    Manchester

    Ian R. Manchester. Transverse dynamics and regions of stability for nonlinear hybrid limit cycles.IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 44:6285–6290, 2010

    work page 2010

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Olindo Zanotti, Luciano Rezzolla, and José A. Font. Quasi-periodic accretion and gravi- tational waves from oscillating ’toroidal neutron stars’ around a schwarzschild black hole. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 341:832–848, 2002

    2002

  2. [10]

    Quasi-periodicoscillations, chaosandsuppression of chaos in a nonlinear oscillator driven by parametric and external excitations.Nonlinear Dynamics, 18:1–24, 1999

    MohamedBelhaqandMohamedHoussni. Quasi-periodicoscillations, chaosandsuppression of chaos in a nonlinear oscillator driven by parametric and external excitations.Nonlinear Dynamics, 18:1–24, 1999

    1999

  3. [11]

    Data-driven nonlinear and stochas- tic dynamics with control, 2024

    Yong Xu, Stefano Lenci, Yongge Li, and Jürgen Kurths. Data-driven nonlinear and stochas- tic dynamics with control, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Stability analysis for a class of stochastic delay nonlinear systems driven by g-brownian motion.Syst

    Quanxin Zhu and Tingwen Huang. Stability analysis for a class of stochastic delay nonlinear systems driven by g-brownian motion.Syst. Control. Lett., 140:104699, 2020

    2020

  5. [13]

    Safetyverification for random ordinary differential equations.IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 39(11):4090–4101, 2020

    BaiXue, MartinFränzle, NaijunZhan, SergiyBogomolov, andBicanXia. Safetyverification for random ordinary differential equations.IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 39(11):4090–4101, 2020

    2020

  6. [14]

    Action functional as an early warning indicator in the space of probability measures via schrödinger bridge.Quantitative Biology, 2024

    Peng Zhang, Ting Gao, Jinqiu Guo, and Jinqiao Duan. Action functional as an early warning indicator in the space of probability measures via schrödinger bridge.Quantitative Biology, 2024

    2024

  7. [15]

    Neural sdes as infinite- dimensional gans

    Patrick Kidger, James Foster, Xuechen Li, and Terry J Lyons. Neural sdes as infinite- dimensional gans. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 5453–5463. PMLR, 2021. 28

    2021

  8. [16]

    Efficient and accurate gradients for neural sdes.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:18747– 18761, 2021

    Patrick Kidger, James Foster, Xuechen Chen Li, and Terry Lyons. Efficient and accurate gradients for neural sdes.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:18747– 18761, 2021

    2021

  9. [17]

    Recent advances in physical reservoir computing: A review.Neural Networks, 115:100–123, 2019

    Gouhei Tanaka, Toshiyuki Yamane, Jean Benoit Héroux, Ryosho Nakane, Naoki Kanazawa, Seiji Takeda, Hidetoshi Numata, Daiju Nakano, and Akira Hirose. Recent advances in physical reservoir computing: A review.Neural Networks, 115:100–123, 2019

    2019

  10. [18]

    Model-free control of dynam- ical systems with deep reservoir computing.Journal of Physics: Complexity, 2(3):035025, 2021

    Daniel Canaday, Andrew Pomerance, and Daniel J Gauthier. Model-free control of dynam- ical systems with deep reservoir computing.Journal of Physics: Complexity, 2(3):035025, 2021

    2021

  11. [19]

    Next generation reservoir computing.Nature communications, 12(1):1–8, 2021

    Daniel J Gauthier, Erik Bollt, Aaron Griffith, and Wendson AS Barbosa. Next generation reservoir computing.Nature communications, 12(1):1–8, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Controlling chaos using edge computing hardware.Nature Communications, 15(1):3886, 2024

    Robert M Kent, Wendson AS Barbosa, and Daniel J Gauthier. Controlling chaos using edge computing hardware.Nature Communications, 15(1):3886, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Controlling chaotic maps us- ing next-generation reservoir computing.Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 34(2), 2024

    Robert M Kent, Wendson AS Barbosa, and Daniel J Gauthier. Controlling chaotic maps us- ing next-generation reservoir computing.Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 34(2), 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Mechanisms and functions of theta rhythms.Annual review of neuro- science, 36(1):295–312, 2013

    Laura Lee Colgin. Mechanisms and functions of theta rhythms.Annual review of neuro- science, 36(1):295–312, 2013

    2013

  15. [23]

    The physiological basis of the effects of intermittent theta burst stimulationofthehumanmotorcortex.The Journal of physiology, 586(16):3871–3879, 2008

    V Di Lazzaro, F Pilato, M Dileone, P Profice, A Oliviero, P Mazzone, A Insola, F Ranieri, M Meglio, PA Tonali, et al. The physiological basis of the effects of intermittent theta burst stimulationofthehumanmotorcortex.The Journal of physiology, 586(16):3871–3879, 2008

    2008

  16. [24]

    Achieving modulated oscillations by feedback control.Physical Review E, 90(2):022909, 2014

    Tian Ge, Xiaoying Tian, Jürgen Kurths, Jianfeng Feng, and Wei Lin. Achieving modulated oscillations by feedback control.Physical Review E, 90(2):022909, 2014

    2014

  17. [25]

    A frequency-amplitude coordinator and its optimal energy consumption for biological oscillators.Nature Communications, 12(1):5894, 2021

    Bo-Wei Qin, Lei Zhao, and Wei Lin. A frequency-amplitude coordinator and its optimal energy consumption for biological oscillators.Nature Communications, 12(1):5894, 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    Sliding-mode control of a soft robot based on data-driven sparse identification.Control Engineering Practice, 2024

    Dimitrios Papageorgiou, Guðrún Þóra Sigurðardóttir, Egidio Falotico, and Silvia Tolu. Sliding-mode control of a soft robot based on data-driven sparse identification.Control Engineering Practice, 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Brunton, Joshua L

    Steven L. Brunton, Joshua L. Proctor, and J. Nathan Kutz. Sparse identification of non- linear dynamics with control (sindyc).arXiv: Dynamical Systems, 2016

    2016

  20. [28]

    On the convergence of the sindy algorithm.Multiscale Model

    Linan Zhang and Hayden Schaeffer. On the convergence of the sindy algorithm.Multiscale Model. Simul., 17:948–972, 2018

    2018

  21. [29]

    An improved koopman-mpc framework for data-driven modeling and control of soft actuators.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 8:616–623, 2023

    Jiajin Wang, Baoguo Xu, Jian yang Lai, Yifei Wang, Cong Hu, Huijun Li, and Aiguo Song. An improved koopman-mpc framework for data-driven modeling and control of soft actuators.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 8:616–623, 2023

    2023

  22. [30]

    Guevara, Viviana Moya, Daniel C

    Bryan S. Guevara, Viviana Moya, Daniel C. Gandolfo, and Juan Marcos Toibero. Pd-based and sindy nonlinear dynamics identification of uavs for mpc design.ArXiv, abs/2410.11791, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Brunton, Joshua L

    Steven L. Brunton, Joshua L. Proctor, and J. Nathan Kutz. Discovering governing equa- tions from data by sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113:3932 – 3937, 2015. 29

    2015

  24. [32]

    The takens embedding theorem.International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 1(04):867–872, 1991

    Lyle Noakes. The takens embedding theorem.International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 1(04):867–872, 1991

    1991

  25. [33]

    Rudy, Steven L

    Samuel H. Rudy, Steven L. Brunton, Joshua L. Proctor, and J. Nathan Kutz. Data-driven discovery of partial differential equations.Science Advances, 3, 2016

    2016

  26. [34]

    CRC press, 2018

    Jagannathan Sarangapani.Neural network control of nonlinear discrete-time systems. CRC press, 2018

    2018

  27. [35]

    Joseph P. Lasalle. The stability of dynamical systems. 1976

    1976

  28. [36]

    Periodic event- triggered adaptive tracking control design for nonlinear discrete-time systems via reinforce- ment learning.Neural Networks, 154:43–55, 2022

    Fanghua Tang, Ben Niu, Guangdeng Zong, Xudong Zhao, and Ning Xu. Periodic event- triggered adaptive tracking control design for nonlinear discrete-time systems via reinforce- ment learning.Neural Networks, 154:43–55, 2022

    2022

  29. [37]

    Dynamic event-triggered and self-triggered control for multi-agent systems.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Con- trol, 64(8):3300–3307, 2018

    Xinlei Yi, Kun Liu, Dimos V Dimarogonas, and Karl H Johansson. Dynamic event-triggered and self-triggered control for multi-agent systems.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Con- trol, 64(8):3300–3307, 2018

    2018

  30. [38]

    Stochastic versions of the lasalle theorem.Journal of Differential Equations, 153:175–195, 1999

    Xuerong Mao. Stochastic versions of the lasalle theorem.Journal of Differential Equations, 153:175–195, 1999

    1999

  31. [39]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 1991

    Ioannis Karatzas and Steven Shreve.Brownian motion and stochastic calculus, volume 113. Springer Science & Business Media, 1991

    1991

  32. [40]

    Elsevier, 2007

    Xuerong Mao.Stochastic differential equations and applications. Elsevier, 2007

    2007

  33. [41]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    Robert Liptser and Albert Nikolaevich Shiryayev.Theory of martingales, volume 49. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    2012

  34. [42]

    Anoteonthelasalle-typetheoremsforstochasticdifferentialdelayequations

    XuerongMao. Anoteonthelasalle-typetheoremsforstochasticdifferentialdelayequations. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 268:125–142, 2002. 30

    2002

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.